Sanders’ campaign got more money, more donors, fewer votes in Arizona

Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vermont, had more donors and collected more campaign donations from Arizona in his presidential campaign than Hillary Clinton but she won more votes from the state on her march to the party’s nomination. (Photo by Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton during a March campaign rally at Carl Hayden High School in Phoenix. She raised less in the state than Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vermont, but still managed to win the primary. (Photo by Ben Moffat/Cronkite News)

WASHINGTON – Sen. Bernie Sanders’ web-driven, grass-roots campaign had close to three times as many contributions from Arizonans and brought in about $123,000 more than Hillary Clinton, out of the $3 million Democratic presidential hopefuls raised in the state.

But the Vermont Democrat was not able to turn those dollars into votes, as Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, won 56 percent of Arizona’s March presidential preference election votes.

The last shall be first

The likely presidential nominee for both major parties (in bold) was not the biggest fundraiser in Arizona, according to the latest Federal Election Commission numbers.

DEMOCRATS: $3 million

Bernie Sanders: $1.6 million

Hillary Clinton: $1.4 million

Martin O’Malley: $12,377

James Webb: $1,450

Lawrence Lessig: $1,250

REPUBLICANS: $3.6 million

Ted Cruz: $1 million

Marco Rubio: $786,221

Ben Carson: $650,572

Jeb Bush: $330,665

Carly Fiorina: $188,696

Rand Paul: $ 161,763

John Kasich: $119,985

Donald Trump: $108,630

Mike Huckabee: $62,772

Chris Christie: $57,850

Scott Walker: $48,428

Rick Santorum: $23,285

Lindsey Graham: $9,450

Bobby Jindal: $8,925

Jim Gilmore: $2,700

Rick Perry: $350

The latest data from the Federal Election Commission, for donations through May 31, shows that Sanders’ average contribution from Arizona was $41, compared to $107 for Clinton.

“Money obviously is one factor in politics, political campaigns, but it’s not the only one,” said Bill Scheel, a partner at Javelina, a Phoenix campaign management and public affairs firm.

“Sanders wasn’t really able to take that small-dollar fundraising advantage and convert it into the voters where he needed it most,” Scheel said.

The FEC numbers show that Sanders netted 37,278 individual contributions from Arizona, compared to 13,326 for Clinton. But the former secretary of State got 262,459 votes in Arizona to Sanders’ 192,962.

“It could be that Clinton just got a lot more votes from people who just didn’t give money,” said Ruth Jones, a professor emerita of political science at Arizona State University.

Clinton saw a sharp uptick in contributions in November and Sanders followed in December with a spike in funds from Arizona. Both pulled in the most money in March, with Clinton collecting nearly $272,000 and Sanders topping her with more than $355,000.

While Sanders raised more money from more contributors in Arizona, nationally Clinton has raised $229.3 million to Sanders’ $222.2 million. Neither campaign responded to requests for comment.

Jones said Sanders has touted that he represents the “little guy” and pursued a “clientele” that wasn’t made up of traditional campaign contributors and was likely to make smaller donations. But she was not surprised that Clinton prevailed.

“I think looking at those numbers, again I don’t think it’s unusual,” Jones said. “Clinton has an organization, she has a network of funders that’s why she raised the money she did. Sanders went after his constituency, that why he had a lot more people.”

Scheel said the donation patterns in Arizona followed the national trend, with Sanders receiving many smaller donations while Clinton pulled the big dollars.

And Democrats in Arizona have always had to rely on a “broader base” of contributors, Scheel said, which is reflected in the large number of Sanders contributors.